Being gay is always and has always been 100% choice, so is being straight, being bi, a murderer, a sociopath, an asshole, a bitch or a retard on GL4X4.

How hard is it for anyone to understand this?????

You are born with certain things you cannot change, color (unless you are MJ), nationality, etc. Everything from there is your choice, do as you choose to, but be prepared to suffer the consequences or those same decisions.

Seriously?

Not everything is not your choice. Did you choose to like the taste of steak, or chicken, or do you just naturally not like it? I know I didn't choose to not like drinking coffee, I tasted it and i did not like it.

Certain things in life are certainly choice, and you can make the choice to fight your natural feelings, much like my friend did. He chose to "want" to be straight, he forced it, but he has point blank told me that he does not have nearly the attraction to a good looking woman as he does to a man.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikesova

You can say it, but I don't believe it.

I agree, you can not choose attraction, but you can choose not to act on it, you can block it out of your mind, you can repress the feelings because you know that you are married and committed to your wife, and to varying degrees i would say you can almost eliminate the attraction, but I don't think you could ever totally eliminate it.

Choice, genetic, wired wrong.... What difference does it make in regards to

It doesnt say "unless you are gay"

I like Cain till he decided to say this. I respect his right to his opinion, but I have lost faith that he will not be able to separate his opinion from upholding the Constitution.

Which bring me to another point I an a co-worker were discussing today.... Eventually one of the Republicans in the race will be running against Obama. Why do they continually feel the need to say stupid things? Bachman with her "Ill have gas at $2.25 per gallon." Perry with "Ill put X number of people back to work by the end of my first term." They all purport themselves to be Conservatives.... Run on an actual conservative ideology, keep your mouth shut and remember you are running against Obama.

The problem is that they aren't actually conservatives. A true conservative would not consider the definition of marriage to be the business of the Government. Marriage belongs to the churches, it should not have a legal component to it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by L4CX

He never excluded them (homosexuals) in any of those things in the first video posted. I also don't feel like Marriage is included in those things. Civil unions, sure. But I think it's completely constitutional to say marriage is for A man and woman only. As long as there is an option for Homosexuals to have the same rights as a marriage.

I agree with you on the second part. They just need to keep thier mouth shut.

so by that logic wouldn't every kid raised by a gay guy who had sex with a woman turn out at least partially gay because of his nurture rather than his nature?

What about the kids who unfortunately have a man man parent situation or a woman woman parent situation, shouldn't they all turn out gay too?

I have yet to find any legitimate study that really confirms or denies this either way.

I did find one study where it was more about the quality of the child, but not their sexuality.

I am now unsure how to feel about this topic...

If we were created by a God. And according to most religious people being gay is an affront to him. Why would he have allowed us to have the programming to be able to be gay? Unless the programming is there and he gives us the freedom of choice to act upon it?

If we were evolved from primates it seems odd that we would have the genetic make up to be able to be gay considering nature, until humans fukc with it, is a pretty perfect design. It doesn't seem like something genetic that goes against what it takes to produce offspring would be as prevalent. It seems like being gay would be some sort of mutation that is not beneficial and would not be propagated to future generations.

I guess maybe this is one of those situations where you just need to accept that it is what it is and not worry about the why. Gay people are gay and whether it be by nature or by choice it doesn't change that fact. If there really is a God that they are affronting the shit out of thats a price they will have to pay with him at a later date and not something we should worry about.

As far as being gay being mainstream goes I'm not a fan either. But ya know, if having a gay guy on primetime tv helps some confused kid figure their life out and become a productive member of society instead of offing themselves I have no problem with it.

I dont think anyone is born gay.. but i also dont think its a choice. Its more of a influence on todays youth. I dont hate gays but i do hate gays that flaunt it and have to "show" how gay they are with the way they act and there style of clothing. Kickstand- i applaud your friend for at least trying. He did the right think. Scooter-you have a good point with bisexuality being 100% choice. It seems like 75% percent of the woman around here are bisexual(which can be fun) haha

I dont think anyone is born gay.. but i also dont think its a choice. Its more of a influence on todays youth. I dont hate gays but i do hate gays that flaunt it and have to "show" how gay they are with the way they act and there style of clothing. Kickstand- i applaud your friend for at least trying. He did the right think. Scooter-you have a good point with bisexuality being 100% choice. It seems like 75% percent of the woman around here are bisexual(which can be fun) haha

Yes stealing is 100% choice and can be influenced. Gay is choice in some ways. I mean if you grow up with two dads and they always kiss,hug, hold hands, etc. In front of you, then as your brain develops its going to learn that being gay is ok or the correct way. Your mind doesnt really no any better. Therefor its not 100% choice. But there is a choice to act on it or ignore it.

I have yet to find any legitimate study that really confirms or denies this either way.

I did find one study where it was more about the quality of the child, but not their sexuality.

I am now unsure how to feel about this topic...

If we were created by a God. And according to most religious people being gay is an affront to him. Why would he have allowed us to have the programming to be able to be gay? Unless the programming is there and he gives us the freedom of choice to act upon it?

If we were evolved from primates it seems odd that we would have the genetic make up to be able to be gay considering nature, until humans fukc with it, is a pretty perfect design. It doesn't seem like something genetic that goes against what it takes to produce offspring would be as prevalent. It seems like being gay would be some sort of mutation that is not beneficial and would not be propagated to future generations.

I guess maybe this is one of those situations where you just need to accept that it is what it is and not worry about the why. Gay people are gay and whether it be by nature or by choice it doesn't change that fact. If there really is a God that they are affronting the shit out of thats a price they will have to pay with him at a later date and not something we should worry about.

As far as being gay being mainstream goes I'm not a fan either. But ya know, if having a gay guy on primetime tv helps some confused kid figure their life out and become a productive member of society instead of offing themselves I have no problem with it.

Try to find a study on this; if we evolved from monkeys then why do we still have monkeys?

Try to find a study on this; if we evolved from monkeys then why do we still have monkeys?

Isolation would explain that part.

Some things change locations and evolve to better suite themselves to that environment. If humans did evolve from monkeys it could be because the human lineage of monkeys were separate from the monkeys we see today.

I don't think we are an evolution of other primates, at least not in the same terms as a birds beak changing shape because of its food source over time. I don't know if I fully believe in creationism either, but I do think there was something involved that we don't fully understand yet.

So much game in a Too Short rap
Blacks can't be white and whites can't be black
Why you wanna act like someone else?
All you gotta do is just be yourself
We're all the same color underneath
Short Dog's in the house you'd better listen to me
Never be ashamed of what you are
Proud to be black stand tall at heart
Even though some people give you no respect
Be intelligent, when you put em in check
Cause when you're ignorant, you get treated that way
And when they throw you in jail you got nothing to say
So if you don't listen it's not my fault
I'll be getting paid while you'll be paying the cost
Sitting in the jailhouse running your mouth
While me and my peoples try to get out

I'm slowly reading that link and I have to say there are some very, very good points.

I like how they draw the comparison of gay being something you are born with being compared to being black and the comparison of gay being a choice with being a certain religion. Both of which are no-nos to discriminate against.

To me that comparison blows any argument about discriminating against gays out of the water...and it should.

I'm slowly reading that link and I have to say there are some very, very good points..

I've read it also, and one point stuck out to me...

Quote:

That has to do with evolution. If a prime motivation of all species is to pass genes on to future generations, and gay men are estimated to produce 80 percent fewer offspring than straight men, why would a gay gene not have been wiped out by the forces of natural selection?

I choose to be gay today. I am going to try to be attracted to men in their various forms and and imagine touching their hairy butts.

I'll post the results of my decision later.

Well, I was gay all day today. I looked at a lot of dudes and got sorta bored so I fixated on their package. Not much to see there, half of them looked like they were trying to shoplift small potatos out of the store. I talked to a few guys while I secretly fondled myself. Nothing! I couldn't get my dick up with a crane at that moment. The men either smelled life B.O. or waaaaay to much cologne. To be sure I was giving this gay thing a fair shake, I went to a rest area on I75 and hung out in the mens' bathroom for a few hours. I would sit in a stall next to somebody and offer them a wrister. Most guys said no but a Catholic preist and 37 truck drivers took me up on my offer. My hands were very tired at the end of the day. When I was done I decided to take a whizz myself. As I was going one of the truckers I just gave a wrister to offered to hold my manhood while I finished peeing. Since I chose to be gay today, I let him. When I was done he shook it off and we parted company.

The day is done and I've come to the conclusion that one can't just decide to be gay or not. I gave it my all yet I would still occasionally think about vaginas and boods while I was gay. I really did not like any of the things I was doing today no matter how hard I tried. So in summary, being gay is programed into a person's brain somehow and it's not a matter of choice.

Oh, can anybody recomment a good detergent to get seman out clothing and shoes?

Why should the goose get anything different than the dog other than the opportunity to be whatever they want? Equal justice under the law because no matter our life choices, we are Humans and American first.

That's exactly what I said. Give the Dog the same Oppurtunity as the Goose. Just dont' redefine what a goose is to get it. Redefine the oppurtunity.

Quote:

The problem with your analogy is it gets to specific.... and as such it will deform into exactly what we have going on right now. Different sets of laws, rules, regulations, standards for each different class, race and sex. The foundation of our laws and rules of society are left broad to as to not discriminate because that is exactly what our founders were getting away from. Today, we are legislating discrimination in an attempt to make everyone equal rather than simply living by the words....

OK, so we have the Government give out Civil Unions that aren't restrictive on what your orientation is. If you want the restriction that comes with a marriage then go to the proper authorities there. The term "marriage' is the goose. So the Dog is non-tradition marriage.

Quote:

It doesnt say "unless you are Gay." Please pay particular attention to which words are capitalized, it meant something when it was written and I believe still does today.

We don't have the right to be married. We have the right to PURSUE happiness. If that means living with a same sex partner then go ahead. Allow them to have the same rights. Just don't call it marriage. If you want to have a marriage, follow the definition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3-foot

Is it better to not know what they think or where they stand?

What part of the constitution grants the power to define marriage?

1.I want to know what they think and where they stand, I just wish some of them would do a little better job thinking about what they say before they say it.

2. Good question. So why do Same sex supporters ask the Government to change that Definition that they, per your question, don't have the power to define?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonkeyBiz

I've read it also, and one point stuck out to me...

Discuss

"Because homosexuals still have kids". I've thought about that scenario alot. My conclusion is that the best you could 'be born as' is Bisexual.

OK, so we have the Government give out Civil Unions that aren't restrictive on what your orientation is. If you want the restriction that comes with a marriage then go to the proper authorities there. The term "marriage' is the goose. So the Dog is non-tradition marriage.

The Government shouldnt be giving anything, simply recognizing the union of 2 people. Call it whatever you want. I realize much of the hubbub is whether its marriage or civil unions... Frankly I dont care. So long as they are afforded the same benefits and privileges as anyone that is involved in a traditional marriage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by L4CX

We don't have the right to be married. We have the right to PURSUE happiness. If that means living with a same sex partner then go ahead. Allow them to have the same rights. Just don't call it marriage. If you want to have a marriage, follow the definition.

I agree "marriage" takes place in a church. So addressing the Government to define it is asinine at best. The reason the homosexual crowd is lobbying the Government in the first place is because there are enough people in the US that do not want to extended the same benefits and privileges to homosexual couples as hetero couples. When it comes to things like survivors benefits, health insurance and retirement benefits... Most of these things recognize a "marriage." But you dont want to call it that, you would rather call it a civil union. Ok, Blue Cross doesnt recognize a civil union (I dont really know, just using it as an example) So Joe and Jim are being denied the same benefits that Joe and Mary get to enjoy. Thats called discrimination and we have been fighting all forms of discrimination for a long time.

Well, I was gay all day today. I looked at a lot of dudes and got sorta bored so I fixated on their package. Not much to see there, half of them looked like they were trying to shoplift small potatos out of the store. I talked to a few guys while I secretly fondled myself. Nothing! I couldn't get my dick up with a crane at that moment. The men either smelled life B.O. or waaaaay to much cologne. To be sure I was giving this gay thing a fair shake, I went to a rest area on I75 and hung out in the mens' bathroom for a few hours. I would sit in a stall next to somebody and offer them a wrister. Most guys said no but a Catholic preist and 37 truck drivers took me up on my offer. My hands were very tired at the end of the day. When I was done I decided to take a whizz myself. As I was going one of the truckers I just gave a wrister to offered to hold my manhood while I finished peeing. Since I chose to be gay today, I let him. When I was done he shook it off and we parted company.

The day is done and I've come to the conclusion that one can't just decide to be gay or not. I gave it my all yet I would still occasionally think about vaginas and boods while I was gay. I really did not like any of the things I was doing today no matter how hard I tried. So in summary, being gay is programed into a person's brain somehow and it's not a matter of choice.

Oh, can anybody recomment a good detergent to get seman out clothing and shoes?

The Government shouldnt be giving anything, simply recognizing the union of 2 people. Call it whatever you want. I realize much of the hubbub is whether its marriage or civil unions... Frankly I dont care. So long as they are afforded the same benefits and privileges as anyone that is involved in a traditional marriage.

I agree "marriage" takes place in a church. So addressing the Government to define it is asinine at best. The reason the homosexual crowd is lobbying the Government in the first place is because there are enough people in the US that do not want to extended the same benefits and privileges to homosexual couples as hetero couples. When it comes to things like survivors benefits, health insurance and retirement benefits... Most of these things recognize a "marriage." But you dont want to call it that, you would rather call it a civil union. Ok, Blue Cross doesnt recognize a civil union (I dont really know, just using it as an example) So Joe and Jim are being denied the same benefits that Joe and Mary get to enjoy. Thats called discrimination and we have been fighting all forms of discrimination for a long time.

I agree with this. I also think that some churches that are more liberal would perform gay marriages. Why should it have to be called something different and have another set of documents (like marriage license, civil union license). I think making those differences doesn't do anything but add cost to the process.
If people are gay why should I care? If they are happy and they aren't molesting the innocent or committing a crime, I say go for it.

The Government shouldnt be giving anything, simply recognizing the union of 2 people. Call it whatever you want. I realize much of the hubbub is whether its marriage or civil unions... Frankly I dont care. So long as they are afforded the same benefits and privileges as anyone that is involved in a traditional marriage.

I agree "marriage" takes place in a church. So addressing the Government to define it is asinine at best. The reason the homosexual crowd is lobbying the Government in the first place is because there are enough people in the US that do not want to extended the same benefits and privileges to homosexual couples as hetero couples. When it comes to things like survivors benefits, health insurance and retirement benefits... Most of these things recognize a "marriage." But you dont want to call it that, you would rather call it a civil union. Ok, Blue Cross doesnt recognize a civil union (I dont really know, just using it as an example) So Joe and Jim are being denied the same benefits that Joe and Mary get to enjoy. Thats called discrimination and we have been fighting all forms of discrimination for a long time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerryann

I agree with this. I also think that some churches that are more liberal would perform gay marriages. Why should it have to be called something different and have another set of documents (like marriage license, civil union license). I think making those differences doesn't do anything but add cost to the process.
If people are gay why should I care? If they are happy and they aren't molesting the innocent or committing a crime, I say go for it.

I think both Gay and Straight 'marriages' should be called something else (Civil Union) in the eyes of the government. I don't see why you guys have issue with that. I wouldn't go to the court house and get a Marriage license, I'd get an application for a Civil union.

I really would solve alot of problems. You'd be able to make the people like me (that think that marriage is A man and a women) Happy while allowing Homosexuals the ability to have the benefits like a Straight spouse would.

As far as Insurance goes, I'm sure they'd change thier policies if the this change was made. If they didn't they'd loose out on too much money from a loss of costumers.